[rules-users] Add/remove objects from working memory are very CPU intensive

[Einat Idan]

Michael,
Thanks for your reply.

When is the next milestone expected?

On 4/12/07, Michael Neale <michael.neale at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> definately upgrade to latest 3.0.x version (3.0.6).
>
> Also, those methods are were most of the work happens, its a common
> misconception that all the work happens lazily when you call "fire all
> rules" but that is not the case, as you assert each object, it propagates
> through the RETE network, so that is normal to see the time spent there for
> lots of data.
>
> you can also try the trunk version if you like, its certainly got some
> improvements, but the next milestone (if you can wait) will be more worth
> your time.
>
> Michael.
>
> On 4/12/07, Einat Idan <idan.einat at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I encountered a serious performance problem using Jboss Rules 3.0.1. The
> > process was executed on a pretty strong machine - a DL350 4 cpu RedHat
> > machine. The process was using about 100% CPU and I used a profiler to see
> > what's going on:
> >
> > My application adds/removes objects to/from the working memory of a
> > stateful rule session quite intensively (2000-3000 per sec), though the
> > intensive actions were related to a single rule session and only a few extra
> > rule sessions existed simultaneously. It turned out that about 7-10% of CPU
> > was consumed per a single add/remove operation. More specifically,
> > ReteooWorkingMemory.doRetract() and ReteooWorkingMemory.doAssertObject()
> > were the major consumers. I would expect a basic operation like this to be
> > significantly less CPU intensive.
> >
> > Would you please provide more information, is my benchmark too
> > ambitious? Do you recommend an upgrade to version 3.0.6? 3.1? If so,
> > please elaborate what were the performance improvements.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Einat Idan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-users mailing list
> > rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20070412/e44cd49d/attachment.html